I understand from Environment Victoria that the EPA is considering your application to build a terminal in Westernport.
EV tells me that you have suggested, in response to a question about proposals to dump wastewater in the Bay, that discharging cold, chlorinated water into Westernport Bay should be considered as “providing water to the environment. Can you explain to me (and perhaps you will need to explain to EPA as well) how the environment can possibly benefit from polluted water discharge? I understand that AGL is also claiming that dumping chlorinated water into the Bay qualifies as a "Re-use" or "Re-cycling" of the water. This sounds a preposterous stretching of the truth. But perhaps you can explain how it isn't?
I suppose you are aware that the delicate environment there includes the precious but threatened Ramsar wetlands? I am very worried that your proposed gas terminal will cause terminal damage to the wetlands. Please tell me how your development will cause no harm when it includes dumping toxic water into the Bay.
On 8 October 2018 the Victorian Minister for Planning required AGL and APA to prepare an Environment Effects Statement (EES) under the Environment Effects Act 1978 (Vic) to assess the potential environmental effects of the Project.
On March 2021, the Minister for Planning completed his assessment under the Environment Effects Act 1978. This concluded the EES process for this project.